Is the Philippines Hispanic? Are Filipinos Hispanic?

The island archipielago of the Republic of the Philippines dates its Spanish days from the arrival in 1521 of Ferdinand Magellan, sailing under the Spanish Crown in search of the Spice Islands. Before this event, the 7,000 islands and islets were not unified as a single political entity, did not have a homogenous ethnic group, and spoke many different tribal languages of the Malayo-Polynesian language family of Austronesian, numbering over 150 presently in the Philippines.

Hispanization occured throughout the centuries with the introduction of Christianity, European customs and modern infrastucture, thus the Philippines possessed the most Westernized of cultures in the East. Spanish acculturation was historically different than the English, Dutch, French, German or other European powers that occupied colonial territory but did not assimilate the local populace or dramatically change it's way of life. The Spaniards in the Americas assimilated and intermarried with the natives resulting in the Hispanic nations of today. The Philippine experience differs in that the Spanish infusion was much more limited than that of the Americas. This influx was mainly in government, military, commerce, religion, and education, but Hispanization of the native people did definitely occur.

Spanish was the language used between the different linguistic groups, to communicate with each other, inter-island and inter-group. It was a unifying factor in the common identity as Filipino, which evolved from a terminology which originally referred to the island-born issue of peninsular Spaniards to its usage today. Christianized, Hispanized Filipinos adopted European customs and were educated in Spanish tradition. Spanish music, drama, arts, foods, clothes, and practices were nativized, but still recognizably Hispanic.

On June 12, 1898, the first Philippine Republic, Republica de Filipinas, declared independence from Spain in Kawit, Cavite. The declaration was written in Spanish. The Malolos Constitution was written in Spanish, and Spanish declared the official language. The National Anthem, Filipinas, was originally written in Spanish by Jose Palma, fused with the Marcha Nacional Filipina by Julian Felipe, and later translated into English and its present-day Filipino version.

The leaders of the independence movement, along with many other revered Filipino heroes such as Emilio Aguinaldo, Marcelo H. del Pilar, Apolinario Mabini, Antonio and Juan Luna, Emilio Jacinto and Jose Rizal, were Spanish-speaking Filipinos. Were they Hispanic? Are their descendants Hispanic?

This is a very hot topic of debate all over the internet, with poorly researched comments thrown out as facts, sentiments hotly debated, personal experiences related, family trees touted, poseurs exposed and insults flying in every direction. It is a global question, with interest from around the world. It seems that there is no one simple answer to this. It is not a yes or a no. The answer is graded from black to white in shades of gray.

That's because we are speaking of a multi-cultural nation, with people from different ethnic and linguistic heritages gathered under one national identity. Different historical events shaped the nation into what it is today. Separate islands and cultural groups weres unified under one banner, when in actuality it was not a nation before unification. It did not have a singular identity as separate islands and linguistic groups. Those that say that the diverse separate islands would have been better off left alone and its people independently on their own would develop into modernity without the influences that it had, or to be absorbed by other powers in another historical fashion are terribly misguided.

Is language the main qualifier in identity to answer the question, or are other factors taken into consideration? Can you identify culturally but not linguistically, or linguistically and culturally to a limited extent and still be entitled to the nominal qualifier? Can it be considered psuedo or partial? Can it be partial and still hold the adjective as a descriptor? It is not all or nothing. It is all entangling. It's all and confusing. One thing is certain. There is no single answer that will satisfy everyone.